This Article  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Paul A. Nutting, MD; Mike Pontious, MD
Ambulatory Sentinel Practice Network

Denver Colo; Tina M. Stull, MD; Joe D. Boone, PhD
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Atlanta, Ga

JAMA. 1996;276(3):197.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.

—Dr Hirsch raises an important point with our study and appropriately questions whether the specific instance described was an error on the part of the referral laboratory in reporting the result of the prothrombin time or whether the error resulted from incorrect interpretation of that result on the part of the primary care physician. In this case, the referral laboratory reported the prothrombin time as the INR, but according to the reporting physician "falsely calculated the INR desirable range up to 6.96 for type 'A' indication for warfarin." The reporting physician further explained that this problem persisted for 2 months and affected at least 1 patient who developed a hematoma as a result of upward adjustments in the warfarin dosage.

Consequently, we believe this event was correctly characterized as a problem in laboratory testing, rather than an error of interpretation. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?